Comparison of the Specificity of Implantable Dual Chamber Defibrillator Detection Algorithms

Abstract

The aim of the study was to compare the specificity of dual chamber ICDs detection algorithms for correct classification of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias derived from clinical studies according to their size to detect an impact of sample size on the specificity. Furthermore, the study sought to compare the specificities of detection algorithms calculated from clinical data with the specificity calculated from simulations of tachyarrhythmias. A survey was conducted of all available sources providing data regarding the specificity of five dual chamber ICDs. The specificity was correlated with the number of patients included, number of episodes, and number of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias recorded. The simulation was performed using tachyarrhythmias recorded in the electrophysiology laboratory. The range of the number of patients included into the studies was 78-1,029, the range of the total number of episodes recorded was 362-5,788, and the range of the number of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias used for calculation of the specificity for correct detection of these arrhythmias was 100 (Biotronik) to 1662 (Medtronic). The specificity for correct detection of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias was 90% (Biotronik), 89% (ELA Medical), 89% (Guidant), 68% (Medtronic), and 76% (St. Jude Medical). There was an inverse correlation (r = -0.9, P = 0.037) between the specificity for correct classification of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias and the number of patients. The specificity for correct detection of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias calculated from the simulation after correction for the clinical prevalence of the simulated tachyarrhythmias was 95% (Biotronik), 99% (ELA Medical), 94% (Guidant), 93% (Medtronic), and 92% (St. Jude Medical). In conclusion, the specificity of ICD detection algorithms calculated from clinical studies or registries may depend on the number of patients studied. Therefore, a direct comparison between different detection algorithms based on clinical data is difficult. In contrast, simulation of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias using a uniform database may be a better tool for direct comparison of the specificity of ICD detection algorithms.

Turning a blind eye to the far field: Are we burying the evidence? A case of abrupt catastrophic implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead failure causing sudden death

“…The Biotronik SMART Detection 9 and the Sorin PARAD+ algorithms 10 are primarily focused on discrimination between supraventricular arrhythmias and ventricular arrhythmias and would have been unlikely to have prevented VF detection and therapy in this case, as they are not designed to detect lead noise.…”

A new method to investigate the response to the morphology discrimination algorithm in patients with ICD

“…Additionally, most of the spontaneous ventricular tachycardias were detected in the V > A rate branch and were not judged by the morphology discrimination algorithm. The specificity of defibrillator algorithms seems to be clearly influenced by the number of patients included, and probably by the number of arrhythmia episodes and the prevalence of arrhythmia studied as shown by Hintringer et al [30]. Therefore, the number of ventricular tachycardias might be too small for adequate statistical analysis and not be representative for a larger patient population.…”

Development of Device Therapy for Ventricular Arrhythmias

“…In spite of these advanced discrimination algorithms, there is room for improvement as inappropriate shock therapy continues to occur. 66 …”